In Conservation Law Foundation, Inc. v. Town of Lincolnville, 2001 ME 175, 786 A.2d 616, the Court was called upon to determine whether a subdivision ordinance requiring the planning board to ensure that an approved subdivision "will not have an undue adverse effect on the scenic or natural beauty of the area, aesthetics, historic sites or rare and irreplacement natural areas of any public rights for physical or visual access to the shoreline" is unduly vague and therefore unconstitutional. Among other arguments espoused by the appealing party was the argument that the ordinance required a subjective analysis and could only depend upon the perspective of the individual making the determination. In approving the language, the Court says the following: "The members of the Lincolnville Planning Board were familiar with the Munroe field area and visited the site before making their determination. They also reviewed other materials submitted by the Developers such as an artist's renderings of the proposed development, a profile of the project which portrayed the heights the residents in relation to a tree line, and engineering data containing contour lines of the slope of the hill . . . Perhaps a board made up of different individuals would have voted differently. Nonetheless, we are satisfied that there was sufficient evidence in the record to support the board's decision."